Pentagon UFO Study - Media Monitoring

[MrBeliever]

There's no question that with all the appearances and people involved that coordination is required, but I'm curious. Are you suggesting it's coordinated in some way beyond the usual scheduling and management issues of the participants and the media, like some shadowy group behind the scenes in the DIA ? ( Which according to one paper said that they [ the DIA ] definitely won't be releasing anything else because Zondo made the request for declassification of the videos under the pretense of using them for training purposes, and then sandbagged them with the UFO angle ).

If you start by putting down the hypothesis that Disclosure is finally happening (making everything I say pure speculation), it's not hard to believe that the entire TTSA movement could be coordinated by a higher level group, or being fed information on a time-released basis by a higher authority, possibly a "cabal" of people from different agencies that knows the best way to bring the truth out.

But that group also has an interest in self-preservation. Remember, they really need us to believe that the military/intelligence communities have both "good guys" (pro-disclosure) and "bad guys" (pro-secrecy). When Disclosure happens, the public needs to be assured that the good guys are in control and can be trusted to be transparent. The David & Goliath story fits into that objective a little too perfectly. Elizondo seems to be following orders, not going rogue.

But people are focused on the dangling carrot: Are we alone? The answer is completely binary: it's either a "yes, as far as we know" or a "no, at least one thing we've observed is definitely not us." If this is real Disclosure, the cabal of insiders likely has all the answers already.

Yet, we're not getting a definitive, binary answer. We're watching an onion being peeled, layer by layer. So, to answer your question on whether it might be coordinated on a higher level, there's two questions I look at to see if it could be deliberate:

• Are there patterns in the dates of major release milestones that would hint that the different actors are following a script? In my opinion, yes, looks like a quarterly thing. Always a major announcement followed by a lull.
• Is the information being deliberately held back and released at convenient, arbitrary dates? Also a yes. Seems most of the information that is being progressively released was declassified and available for years, but the decision is in the hands of people who don't want it to come out all at once.

Let's look at the timeline, divided in 3-month periods:

1. October - November 2017: TTSA is born and the carrot is dangled. Tom Delonge makes noise and self-destructs.

Red flag: Elizondo suddenly and conveniently joins the party here as Delonge's unpopularity threatens the project. But he assures us he resigned and this is all a big coincidence.
​

2. December 2017 - February 2018: Bombshell NY Times article, 2 videos, revelation that the US recovered technology that didn't originate on Earth

Red flag: The Nimitz video and story were already leaked publicly years ago with no significant differences.
Red flag: Tom Delonge stated all the way back in October that 2 videos would be released. They were likely declassified before Elizondo resigned.
Red flag: In April, we learned that part of the source material for the Times article was a decade-old declassified executive report that TTSA could safely have chosen to share all along.
Red flag: Davis, Puthoff and Elizondo do not tell us about AAWSA yet, although they risk nothing by mentioning it.
​

3. March - May 2018: Go Fast and the new arms race. Spotlight on BAASS and AAWSA to keep the masses occupied as Elizondo goes into hiding.

Red flag: Go Fast was confirmed to be part 2 of Gimbal. Hard to believe they were released separately.
Red flag: Knapp released cut footage from a January 2018 interview with Elizondo talking about the "3 videos;" the segment was filmed long before there was a third video.
Red flag: Leak of decade-old DIRDs that were never classified, 2 of which were available online as early as last December. Reid has been saying they were all easy to find if you know where to look, but he's not going to do the work for us.
Red flag: Nothing is stopping Elizondo from popping his head out and clarifying what AAWSA is. Suspiciously enough, he's been busy going on an international tour that involves staying in the country but mailing out taped interviews to other countries' UFO conferences.
​

4. June - August 2018 (so far): Nimitz testimony intensifies, and the effects of UFOs on humans.

Red flag: Hal Puthoff suddenly addresses DIRDs, AAWSA, etc. at a lecture, even though all these topics could have been addressed long before, and he no doubt received countless inquiries from journalists. He mentions effects of UFOs on humans in new detail, such as people getting sun burns or X-ray burns.
Red flag: Trevor comes out and gives us a possible glimpse of the next layer of the onion: these are not newfangled "AAVs," they're flying saucers. Different people saw different things.
Red flag: Kevin Day, Nimitz vet, nearly pinpoints the date he suddenly decided to round up all the witnesses he knows and support Fravor: around June 1st. Yet we know there was media interest in him way before that. He also briefly started responding to people online before going silent in the months leading up to this.
Red flag: Kevin Day has some kind of exclusivity deal with Coast 2 Coast on the topic of the effects of UFOs on humans, a topic that BAASS is an authority on.​

Obviously, it's still early to delineate this as the true pattern, but all these red flags stand out and tell me the information that is being slow dripped is not being acquired and disseminated at TTSA's pleasure. There's no reason that TTSA would have the power to gag ex-BAASS scientists, or to tell Nimitz witnesses (possibly BAASS interviewees) not to come forward after a certain date. Has to be a larger group of experts behind the scenes that is being allowed to operate as it pleases.

 

[Hollywood Tomfortas]

Btw, for the giggles, here's one part of the letters that hoaxer sent to LMH:

That's some serious ufology. It's pretty unbelievable how a hoax like that has led to several decades of such nonsense.

But wait, just now posted on TTSA’s Instagram account. The amazing vagueness continues.

But wait, there’s even more exacting vagueness in the comment TTSA makes to introduce the above graphic:

“In addition to nurturing existing relationships and educating domestic policy makers, our team is formulating global strategic partners. Foreign countries that don’t want to see their information disappear into a black hole of bureaucracy are eager to collaborate given our commitment to public benefit.”

 

[Realm]

“In addition to nurturing existing relationships and educating domestic policy makers, our team is formulating global strategic partners. Foreign countries that don’t want to see their information disappear into a black hole of bureaucracy are eager to collaborate given our commitment to public benefit.”

"Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak." -- Sun Tzu (allegedly)

 

[Randall]

Again, this is not about opposing perspectives, but about Thomas making more and more ridiculous lies and accusations against me, with you among others accepting his behavior. My posts above contain plenty of direct links and quotes that prove his lies, and that's not a matter of opinion. His posts also prove just how delusional he is, both with his conspiracy theories and accusations against me.

You'll notice my plea for renewed objectivity went out to both of you. I understand how tensions can build over contentious issues, and I'm not familiar with all the claims made against each other's personalities and I'm not here to take sides in a personality war. I'm just here to get and share information.

If you want to see a balanced mix of all all kinds of viewpoints, including the sort of people who are actually capable of investigating and making logical conclusions about this stuff, ATS seems to be a place where that can happen, and where the crowd in general doesn't accept blatant lying and baseless accusations.

I just went to look at ATS ( haven't been there in a while ) and don't like the way it's formatted with so many ads and a small area for posting, and there seems to be no shortage of dissention there either. So The Paracast forum remains preferable for me.

The value of this place is mostly in demonstrating why this topic is ridiculed and how old hoaxes are kept alive with increasingly ridiculous theories by True Believers. Speaking of which, Jason Colavito has promised to report today about an old solution to those layered "mystery" materials and stated "the whole thing appears to be an embarrassment to ufology". If only those who should feel the most embarrassed were capable of it.

I find that The Paracast has consistently made an effort to separate the signal from the noise, but people are still free to express their beliefs. So while The Paracast respects people's right to express themselves, it's far from being a supporter of 'True Believerism', which in my view is entirely different than holding a belief for good reasons. Some people consider true believers to be anyone who believes something without scientifically valid verifiable material evidence. I don't think that it's reasonable to require that level of evidence. Other people do. So there's a lot of room for interpretation. Where do you set the line?

I'm pretty sure Colavito is talking about an industrial process for separating bismuth from lead, but I don't know if he has found any new information for identifying the smelter (or lead recycler), for example. In any case, the real story is in how ridiculously stupid that hoax was to begin with, how dishonest Linda Moulton Howe has been on reporting about the results (which e.g. clearly indicated it was just industrial waste and how that magnesium was most likely popular sand-casting alloy known as ZK-60), and how True Believers have kept on believing to that crap for more than two decades now and made it even more ridiculous by changing the alloys to "metamaterials" and Linda's theories of levitation with electricity to one with terahertz radiation, and so on. It really is a story of deserved ridicule, and as long as such hoaxes are so easy and successful, this topic will stay a matter of ridicule.

Ridicule doesn't advance anyone's understanding of the subject matter. It's a waste of time and energy that could be better spent on objective reporting.

If you want to make some real progress, try to do something to that problem. That's what I'm doing. Getting rid of the nonsense is the way to have the next credible event taken seriously and investigated in time.

I'm all for that. If you two can keep the content objective then you're both welcome to participate in helping to construct an objective exposé on the whole affair for the USI website. I was looking into Google Docs and Drive for collaborative sharing. Are you familiar with that? I'm suggesting we start with the construction of a timeline. Would you be interested?

( This offer goes out to anyone interested in collaborating on content for the USI site ).

 

[Randall]

... Let's look at the timeline, divided in 3-month periods ...

Very interesting. In order to make all this clearer, I've invited anyone interested in ufology to help create content for the USI website, and for this topic, the approach you're taking with a timeline fits right in. Would you be interested in participating in collaborative content creation?

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

Cool. I think the easiest way to chip away at it would be to build the timeline first. That would be as simple as a bulleted list, each item consisting of a date | event | synopsis ( a sentence or two ) | link to story. Do you use Google Drive and Docs? We could share the editing that way. I'm not familiar with collaborative editing there yet, but just had a look. It's free and could be an interesting way to co-create excellent content. When we publish we can also create a profile page for you along with links to your other projects too. That way you'll get proper credit and a bit of cross-marketing.

If that sounds good I'll get the ball rolling and send you the share link via email over the weekend.

Thanks, I'm intrigued with this project. Uforadio has done an amazing job collecting media coverage of this story in chronological order, but I don't think that anyone's created a true timeline+database type of resource to put all the pieces together, and that would be a great tool for everyone interested in this story.

I'd like to hear about your precise intentions with this project - I'm already seeing people jockeying for an opportunity to "spin" this story to fit their personally favored narrative, and I have zero interest in that kind of thing. If this is going to be used to bolster anyone's personal prejudices, then it's not for me. I'm only interested if this is about gathering objective and verified facts, not pushing conspiracy theories, or to bolster the already fever-pitch suspicions about this story - which appears to be The Paracast's default position on the matter, unfortunately. Which is agonizing, because far less credible and discerning shows like C2C AM have picked up the ball that was dropped here, so I have to go to those alternatives to hear interviews about it.

I did listen to it. It's too interesting not to! But there were some flags for me in the delivery that didn't sound like it was coming from the sort of person who was in the position he claims he is. That's not sufficient by itself to say it's a hoax, but we're talking about the use of high technology and military training, but his delivery sounded like a guy who'd just watched an episode of the X-Files and mapped it all onto the Nimitz case. But that's just my impression. It could be perfectly legit too, and he's just not used to doing interviews.

Both of the radar operators who have come forward this month were enlisted men and this is probably the first time they've ever been interviewed for a broadcast/podcast, at least it sounds that way to me. Going on the air is a spooky experience for many people; I just read The Art of Talk by Art Bell and I was stunned to learn that he often had anxiety attacks before going on the air. That's a pretty common reaction; basically a form of stage fright. Neither interview elicited suspicion on my BS meter, but we'll see what comes out.

Like I said, I'd like to hear your honest intentions with collecting and disseminating a timeline and articles/blog posts etc. about this story. If it's intended to be a hit piece or to fan the flames of paranoia, then I'll leave that to others. But if you're looking to just state the facts, in a manner that a scientist, for example, would like to peruse in order to see the objective data so they can make up their own mind about it, then I'd love to help.

 

[MrBeliever]

Very interesting. In order to make all this clearer, I've invited anyone interested in ufology to help create content for the USI website, and for this topic, the approach you're taking with a timeline fits right in. Would you be interested in participating in collaborative content creation?

No, but if you see anything useful in my posts, feel free to quote, reuse, etc... I'm anonymous, I have no expectations of attribution.

 

[MrBeliever]

I've figured it all out!

Here are my latest predictions/wild speculation:

1. We're soon going to get confirmation that the rumored "USO" did in fact exist and was a flying saucer hiding in the water. The Tic Tacs are reconnaissance drones used for purposes similar to a periscope on a submarine. Not sure if it's 1 Tic Tac per saucer or 1 fleet of Tic Tacs per saucer, but each one is controlled by AI, as evidenced by the systematic yo-yo behavior when approached by wildlife. I assume there's also a manual override if you need to have a playful dogfight with an F-18.

2. Saucers are classified, but Tic Tacs and metamaterials are not. When AATIP/BAASS put together the declassified executive report, it omitted the saucers but allowed components such as the Tic Tacs and metamaterials to hang out. The "lie" may have started then, and the only way they could get the full truth out was by having "anonymous Trevor" leak one classified detail: "I saw a clearly dome-shaped, flat-bottomed saucer." They're peeling one more layer off the onion, and suddenly the focus is not on the various components anymore. It's not just UFOs that are real, it's also flying saucers. The ability to dangle the superficial stuff first is what made Nimitz the ideal first case for slow-drip disclosure.

3. Gimbal and Go Fast are footage of the same phenomenon as Nimitz. They were also picked specifically because they occurred over international waters.

4. Knapp and Corbell have privileged access to BAASS/AATIP-related sources, and are outlets for sensitive or classified information. All the information and documents "leaked" so far were at some point in the hands of either BAASS personnel or TTSA board members long before the NY Times article hit. These are being disseminated through a sort of divide-and-conquer strategy. They get the information out in bits through different journalists so that there's legal protections. Each leak is relatively small and insignificant on its own; in fact, unless you know the story well, they all sound like typical crazy UFO stories. But all together, they enable people like Puthoff and Elizondo to go into more detail without disclosing anything sensitive, because the news articles associated with the leaks are evidence that the information was public knowledge.

5. There is no way the new Nimitz witnesses spontaneously decided to come forward. We may find out that Fravor, Trevor, Kevin and the other Nimitz witnesses that are about to come out of hiding were all interviewed by BAASS about the effects of close encounters on humans. Whoever planned this coordinated witness roll-out had access to their files and made sure to select witnesses known to have a very narrow point of view. Each witness is a classified document, but you can't cut people into pieces or tell them the whole truth and ask them to selectively lie like a trained spy. You can however find people that have complementary knowledge that only slightly overlaps, and you can control the order and the pace of information releases. If they had NDAs preventing them from coming forward until now, the authority that issued them may have revoked them. The timing and the very narrow nature of the first-hand accounts we've seen so far seem deliberate.

 

[MrBeliever]

The Kevin Day C2C interview was a bit disappointing; Knapp basically repeated much of the information that was divulged in the John Burroughs interview and put it in question form, and Kevin didn't expand much. The whole thing was a bit limp.

With that said, a few new details did come out:

- 2004 was not the first "tic tac incident." There was at least one earlier incident involving the Nimitz strike group in 2003, but it was not described in any detail.
- The topic of the USO was brushed and we have confirmation that Kevin saw something go into the water and come out, but it looks like they are still sticking to Fravor's superficial testimony, which is that he saw the water roiling, but couldn't see the source of the agitation underneath. Indeed, according to Trevor's testimony, the saucer was not filmed by Fravor's F-18.
- When asked a suspiciously generic question about whether he felt that people who had one sighting usually had follow up sightings later on in life, Kevin implied that for him and others, 2004 was the first in a series of sightings that kept happening even after leaving active duty, but that he wasn't ready to talk about it. Really smells like a gag order.
- Kevin dropped the bombshell that 2 years ago (which would put this at 2016), he was visited by two people in suits he described as "spooks." He said he didn't know their affiliation but realized after the fact that they were "probably" associated with AATIP or BAASS (Which he pronounced B-A-A-S-S and not "bass"). These people encouraged him to come forward, and alluded to the fact that he had an important role to play in bringing the truth to the world through his testimony. He says this encounter was directly responsible for him feeling like it was now OK to publicly come forward with details.

In other words, he talked to people who were directly in charge of coordinating this disclosure effort since as early as 2016, and he suspects they were affiliated with AATIP or BAASS! They went around and "activated" all these Nimitz witnesses as part of their strategy way ahead of time! Wow.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

I listened to last night's interview as well, and I was struck by the numbers he provided: he said that the objects on their scope were moving at only 100 knots (similar to the estimates I've seen regarding the Go Fast footage) and flying at a constant altitude of 28,000ft - but when approached, they'd dropped to the ocean in .78 seconds. They examined the data carefully so they could see exactly how quickly it was happening.

That works out to an average speed of over 24,000 miles per hour. And apparently they would return to their original altitude at the same rate. An M16 rifle round travels at about 2000mph, so this is 12 times faster than that. Apparently the world's fastest supersonic missile is the BrahMos missile which can travel at Mach 3, which is nearly 2300mph, and they plan on upgrading it to reach Mach 5, which is 3800mph.

But it's the acceleration that's really mind-boggling. The lowest possible acceleration can be found by assuming that the objects accelerated during the first half of the time observed, and decelerated during the second half to come to a stop at the surface of the ocean.

The acceleration of gravity at the Earth's surface is 9.8m meters/second^2, so we call that 1 g. The acceleration of gravity at the surface of the Sun is about 27 g's. These objects had a minimum acceleration of about 5600 g's. And they produced no sonic boom or propulsion signature in the process. So this is the kind of example that forces me to conclude that these kinds of devices are employing some kind of gravitational field propulsion system, because it's the only known propulsion concept that eliminates the g-forces completely (and produces no visible propulsion signature).

 

[Erno86]

I did listen to it. It's too interesting not to! But there were some flags for me in the delivery that didn't sound like it was coming from the sort of person who was in the position he claims he is. That's not sufficient by itself to say it's a hoax, but we're talking about the use of high technology and military training, but his delivery sounded like a guy who'd just watched an episode of the X-Files and mapped it all onto the Nimitz case. But that's just my impression. It could be perfectly legit too, and he's just not used to doing interviews.

I also listened to Jerry Corbell's interview with Trevor...and I agree with you; though I haven't had a chance to listen to the latest C2C interview on the subject. What about the existence of the JNAP114 law? These enlisted/former enlisted U.S. personnel seem to skirt that law with impunity, by leaking supposedly classified data about UFO's, unless this case is just one big PSY OP instigated by the CIA spooks over at Langley, Virginia; that is somewhat vaguely similar to the George Adamski case.
Above all...where is the domed saucer film footage, and why hasn't it been released to the public?

 

[Randall]

I also listened to Jerry Corbell's interview with Trevor...and I agree with you; though I haven't had a chance to listen to the latest C2C interview on the subject. What about the existence of the JNAP114 law? These enlisted/former enlisted U.S. personnel seem to skirt that law with impunity, by leaking supposedly classified data about UFO's, unless this case is just one big PSY OP instigated by the CIA spooks over at Langley, Virginia; that is somewhat vaguely similar to the George Adamski case.
Above all...where is the domed saucer film footage, and why hasn't it been released to the public?

All good questions!

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

What about the existence of the JNAP114 law?

I don’t know what that is – do you have a link?

These enlisted/former enlisted U.S. personnel seem to skirt that law with impunity, by leaking supposedly classified data about UFO's, unless this case is just one big PSY OP instigated by the CIA spooks over at Langley

Both radar operators say that they were never asked to sign an NDA and nobody ever told them to keep quiet about this case.

I’m so sick of the factless conspiracy theories surrounding all of this. You’re saying that after 70 years of policy maintaining ufo denial and public mockery, suddenly the CIA decided to perpetrate a gigantic hoax to convince people that they actually do exist, apparently for no discernible reason whatsoever. It defies all sense and logic.

Above all...where is the domed saucer film footage, and why hasn't it been released to the public?

I don’t understand why nobody seems to grasp military security and classification. So let’s look at a simple example.

Imagine that the US military were to take high-resolution video footage of covert tests of the latest BrahMos missile as it reached Mach 5 and executed a series of in-flight maneuvers to test its flight capabilities. That footage would be extremely highly classified, in part because it shows the cutting-edge technological capabilities of a foreign nation, and partly because it reveals the technological capabilities of our own intelligence gathering apparatus.

These devices make the BrahMos supersonic missile look about as advanced as a Tonka toy. The intelligence value of the footage Trevor saw is incalculable – it could offer critical clues to the operation of a technology light-years ahead of our best defense technology.

It would be insane to share that footage with the public, because by sharing it with us, they’d also be sharing it with all of our nation’s geopolitical adversaries. And they might glean key clues about the operation of that technology by analyzing the footage.

Everything of significant defense intelligence value is automatically classified. So it’s a minor miracle that we’ve seen even those worthless little blurry snippets of footage that have been released so far, if they do in fact depict some kind of alien or otherwise unidentified technology. But that’s why we’ve been allowed to see those clips: they’re basically worthless, as far as intelligence value goes. So I’ll be absolutely stunned if we ever see any really interesting video from the DoD or any other government body.

 

[Randall]

... Everything of significant defense intelligence value is automatically classified ... It would be insane to share that footage with the public ... Both radar operators say that they were never asked to sign an NDA and nobody ever told them to keep quiet about this case ... It defies all sense and logic.

I think that at least some of answers are in your own reasoning.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

I think that at least some of answers are all in your own reasoning.

What do you mean?

 

[Randall]

What do you mean?

Given that "... Everything of significant defense intelligence value is automatically classified ... " and "... It would be insane to share that footage with the public ..." How likely is it that not one but, "... Both radar operators say that they were never asked to sign an NDA and nobody ever told them to keep quiet about this case ..." yet they were privy to video and intel that, "... makes the BrahMos supersonic missile look about as advanced as a Tonka toy. The intelligence value of the footage Trevor saw is incalculable ..." Yet we're all supposed to take the word of a guy on the radio who we have seen no proof of credentials for, at face value? That's not a conspiracy theory. It's reasonable skepticism.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

Given that "... Everything of significant defense intelligence value is automatically classified ... " and "... It would be insane to share that footage with the public ..." How likely is it that not one but, "... Both radar operators say that they were never asked to sign an NDA and nobody ever told them to keep quiet about this case ..." yet they were privy to video and intel that, "... makes the BrahMos supersonic missile look about as advanced as a Tonka toy. The intelligence value of the footage Trevor saw is incalculable ..." Yet we're all supposed to take the word of a guy on the radio who we have seen no proof of credentials for, at face value? That's not a conspiracy theory. It's reasonable skepticism.

Of course Trevor's identity and credentials should be verified; that's not what I was calling a conspiracy theory. Erno86 suggested that this entire AATIP story is a CIA PsyOp. That is a conspiracy theory. On C2C last night, George Knapp stated that he had confirmed Kevin Day's identity and credentials. I respect George Knapp as a journalist, so I assume that he actually did verify his credentials. But there are people in this thread who would assume that George Knapp is in on "the conspiracy."

As far as anecdotal testimony goes, that's not of any significant intelligence value, so there wouldn't be much reason to tell the radar operators to keep quiet. Without the optical disk data, or the gun camera footage, or other supporting data from the event, all we have are a couple of guys talking about their experiences. That poses no threat to national security - people have been telling their stories about this kind of thing for over 70 years.

 

[Randall]

Of course Trevor's identity and credentials should be verified; that's not what I was calling a conspiracy theory. Erno86 suggested that this entire AATIP story is a CIA PsyOp. That is a conspiracy theory. On C2C last night, George Knapp stated that he had confirmed Kevin Day's identity and credentials. I respect George Knapp as a journalist, so I assume that he actually did verify his credentials. But there are people in this thread who would assume that George Knapp is in on "the conspiracy."

Knapp has his critics, but I've always liked him. Something I heard on another show is that he invested in the TTSA venture just before the media pumping he was directly involved with. It's a bit disturbing if it's true. I dunno. It's another part of the whole crazy story that needs to be verified.

As far as anecdotal testimony goes, that's not of any significant intelligence value, so there wouldn't be much reason to tell the radar operators to keep quiet.

But your assumption was that it would be "automatically classified", which I'm assuming means nobody gets to talk about it whether they have backup evidence or not. To settle that I guess we'd need reference material on how that works. Someone like Kevin Randle or John Alexander or @Walter Bosley or @Decker would know more about how that actually works. Otherwise we're just making assumptions.

Here's someplace you might want to start: 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

But your assumption was that it would be "automatically classified", which I'm assuming means nobody gets to talk about it whether they have backup evidence or not. To settle that I guess we'd need reference material on how that works. Someone like Kevin Randle or John Alexander @Walter Bosley or @Decker would know more about how that actually works.

Here's someplace you might want to start: 18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

I was referring to the material evidence (the data, any official documents/analyses on the matter, the high-rez gun camera footage, any recovered fragments, etc), which would certainly be classified. The testimony of ufo witnesses would be essentially worthless, so it wouldn't really matter. But I'm always happy to learn more about all that stuff from people like Kevin Randle and others with government security experience.

Knapp has his critics, but I've always liked him. Something I heard on another show is that he invested in the TTSA venture just before the media pumping he was directly involved with. It's a bit disturbing if it's true. I dunno. It's another part of the whole crazy story that needs to be verified.

Let's say that's true for the sake of argument. So what? TTSA is basically a charity organization. People donating to it aren't expecting their money back, and the "shares" they get aren't even traded. So if he donated to it and then promoted it, that would be like donating to the Red Cross and then promoting it with a series of news segments and interviews. I don't see how anyone could spin that into something unethical or insidious, but then again, I never thought I'd see people complaining about a government insider coming forward to let us know about a Pentagon ufo investigation program and its totally affirmative conclusions, either...strange world.

 

[DROBNJAK]

The testimony of ufo witnesses would be essentially worthless, so it wouldn't really matter.

That is only partially true.

UFOs are transient phenomena. Scientifically speaking, transient phenomena can only be studied through statistics, not unlike quantum mechanics. Nobody can measure exact position and speed of a single electron, but everybody can easily measure both properties of million electrons and than extract averages.

A statistical study of large sample of uncorrelated UFO witness testimonies, would lead to reliable and tangible, albeit in UFO's case qualitative, information about any phenomena. Even qualitative UFO information can be useful because we can recognize many of UFO properties which are within our scientific knowledge.

When he wrote the paper UFO REPORTS INVOLVING VEHICLE INTERFERENCE Dr. Mark Rodeghier extracted 448 cases out of a database with 40,000 records and provided the strongest rational and un-debunkable proof that UFOs are here.

Dr. Mark Rodeghier and Ray Stamford both stand shoulder to shoulder as a men who contributed the most to a scientific study of UFOs.

But serious work like that either takes years or costs millions. Ray Stamford said that he spent $2M on his mobile lab.

We just need more physical measurements, we are drowning in witness testimonials. Combined MUFON's, NUFORC's, CUFOS' in US and few other databases in UK and France have more than 200,000 testimonials. Plenty for statistical research, for somebody who has necessary time.